While I'm still surprised that they allowed the spire to be proposed and in advanced stages of design then, only to be cut now, it does happen (1WTC's fiberglass antenna for example). But hopefully with good tapering, they can at least conclude the building sensibly if the spire is indeed cut.

I still hope not, though! This is one building where it's visually and aesthetically integral to the flow of the tower.

Can't read that article we'll need better confirmation then that to believe that the spire been cut from the design.

I know the translation is "a little bit" weird (google translator) but it's good enough to understand it.

Quote:

Shenzhen's tallest building 60 meters short of the aviation industry as a high limit adjustment

February 25, 2015 Southern Metropolis Daily

"Design 660 meters, is now 600 meters." Earlier users post, said, originally designed for 660-meter-high safe financial center, the final height will be locked in the 600 meters. Southern Reporter confirmed the news from the authorities. The height of the "shrink", allegedly because of the high limit due to aviation.
Ping Financial Center project with a total construction area of ​​460,700 square meters, the project investment of not less than 50 billion yuan, will be built as the headquarters of China's Ping An and Shenzhen to become the financial industry and urban construction of a new milestone. According to the design plan was announced, the main height of 588.45 meters, the design height of 660.00 meters: the first will be built in China, the world's second tallest building. In July last year, the project had already exceeded the Beijing-based, to become the tallest skyscraper in Shenzhen. December 29, 2014 afternoon, the concrete core wall structure of the project 555.5 m official cap. As the project's general contractor in the construction of the media to participate in a game of capping ceremony to announce the project will be fully completed in April 2016, after the completion of the total height will reach 600 meters.
"Others have not changed, in fact, the original antenna withdrawal", the Southern reporter was informed that the 60 meters short of the main spire is canceled "antenna" means the body does not affect the original design. Official said, mainly because of the height limit due to aviation.
Temporarily adjust the height, this is not the first high-rise buildings facing this problem. Guangzhou landmark waistline, for example, the international competition program to determine the height of 610 meters. And after the completion of the airport air traffic control authorities to assess and coordinate with the government, reduced to 600 meters below. The main way to reduce, but also cut the antenna. This had a cost of more than ten million more, schedule delays for months

When it's completelly finished including a good light instalation (at the top), i'm convinced a few month later most people here will say "great building". And the missing spire is forgotten.
It's not this thread but i changed my opinion about another loved or hated supertall also: the 432 Park Avenue "stick".
At the beginning i thought what an ugly and boring slim design. It don't fit in the skyline and looks terrible.
But now when it's almost finished i like it more and more.
I think it's also a question of "get used to it"...and Ping An will be unique because it looks like an obelisk.
Perhaps this will become it's funny nickname:
the shenzhen obelisk

I have to admit, the new design isn't that bad. While the spire didn't detract from the tower, I always feel like that such things are "cheating." Sure the Burj Khalifa is 830m tall, but the highest floor is 585m and the observatory is like 555m. The Kingdom Tower under construction in Jeddah is the same; a one kilometer tower but what's the highest floor? 600m? Where will the observatory (if there is one) be?

It's one thing to build a massive spire on a building, I think it's another to be able to build habitable floors. While the spires generally aren't ugly or off putting (like Khalifa or Kingdom), it just feels like a cop-out sometimes. Imagine having a penthouse a kilometre up - like 432 Park Avenue. That would be beyond fantastic! I've found that sometimes giant spires are added more out ... compensation for something *cough* than architectural necessity; take the Nanjing Zifeng Tower, its observatory tops out at 270m but the tower is 450m! I can say I visited a supertall, but I, personally, never got that high. Wheras the ICC in Hong Kong is "only* 30m taller, the observatory is over 100m higher!

while it is sad to see the spire not go ahead, it was basically just a stick on top. The diagram on the previous page looks strange without the spire, but I think that's because we are so used to the design with the spire. give it a couple of months, and I think most people will be fine with the change.

It is a bit like the SWFC, which was originally supposed to have a round hole, but ended up with a square(ish) hole. I vaguely remember when this design change was announced, a lot of people were against it, but I think after it was completed everyone agreed it was a good change.

In the case of Ping An, this change is nowhere near as large. Personally, I think it will still be amazing, and in a way, it improves the design because it finishes off cleanly, rather than with an arbitrarily high stick on top.

__________________
"Never memorize what you can look up in books" Albert Einstein
"It's kind of fun to do the impossible." Walt Disney

well why is it when they design it they do not put into consideration that it will be too tall close to the airport? I do not get it.. and now they just realize it?

I think that's probably just an excuse. I suspect (but obviously can't prove) the reason might have rather more to do with investment in Qianhai than air routes.

The suggested reason for that is similar to a reason why the Chinese government got so upset about China being recently declared the world's biggest economy. As Joseph Stiglitz put it:

"There was one more concern, and it was a big one: China understands full well America’s psychological preoccupation with being No. 1—and was deeply worried about what our reaction would be when we no longer were."
(From his Vanity Fair column 'The Chinese Century' - can't link to it yet)

Whilst China is still transitioning from an economy based on exporting to America and the West to one driven much more by domestic demand, it is vulnerable to America/Americans behaving as if China is a rival, e.g. demanding trade barriers etc.

Something similar might be happening as regards having the world's second tallest building.

Currently Shenzhen's biggest project is Qianhai, and this project's success or failure is massively dependent on Hong Kong investment and HK companies. Shenzhen's 2014 GDP was US$260bn; HK's 2013 GDP was US$274bn. Qianhai's goal is to boost GDP by $23.7bn by 2020. Well...

Effectively, although Shenzhen is bending over backwards to state that Qianhai is win-win, a successful Qianhai would probably also spell the end of HK being the economic big dog of the pair. This would presumably have big knock-on effects economically, but it is also unclear how Hong Kongers would react to their little tacky pet of a city (as many Hong Kongers have traditionally seen Shenzhen) becoming economically dominant. Enough anti-Shenzhen sentiment in HK might derail investment in Qianhai at a time when the scheme is still highly vulnerable.

If Ping'an were to become the tallest building in China then it might encourage some Hong Kongers to stop seeing Shanghai as its big rival, and start seeing Shenzhen as its rival.

Maybe Shenzhen isn't ready to step out of the shadows quite yet, and is unwilling to risk global and neighbourly attention by having the world's second-tallest building...

Just a theory, of course! But the flight restrictions idea seems like BS to me, so I suspect there's another reason.

...I always feel like that such things are "cheating."...
...I've found that sometimes giant spires are added more out ... compensation for something *cough* than architectural necessity; take the Nanjing Zifeng Tower, its observatory tops out at 270m but the tower is 450m! I can say I visited a supertall, but I, personally, never got that high. Wheras the ICC in Hong Kong is "only* 30m taller, the observatory is over 100m higher!

I share the same opinion.
For example: in 1998 i wasn't such informed and enthusiatic about skyscrapers as today. The former Sears Tower (Willis Tower) was the highest skyscraper since 1974.
Than i've heard about the Petronas Towers "...which breaks the hight record that Willis Tower owns for 24 years.
As i saw them ( indeed fantastic buildings) i was nevertheless disappointed

The discussion who likes Ping an more with or without a spire is a matter of taste.

But the official ranking system is imo not able to measure the real size of a building compared to others which are officially higher or smaller. When the spire is a part of the building from beginn it counts to the total hight.
If added after completion there's officially no reason to change the hight in a ranking. Especially this part of hight measurement is something i will never get used to.
There are examples that are downright ridiculous imo:
Bank of America Tower in New York is higher than Aon Center in Chicago...4 Times Square in New York higher (!!!) than Dubai Rose Rotana...and so on...
I think they should measures more by roof hights and highest occupied floors.